It doesn't give you exact values. It can give you wildly inaccurate values if you don't "appraise" properly.

I don't know of any PCs that have put a lot of ranks into appraise. A few, yes, but not many. Most games handwave the valuation of loot, with GMs simply telling the players what loot was found on those bodies and treasury - not asking them to spend a fair bit of time rolling to see if they figure it all out correctly.

That is the case, usually. Most groups will jump at the chance to get a flat 50 for the loot they don't want. Why risk it? That's a combination of meta-game and ease of play.

It doesn't give you exact values. It can give you wildly inaccurate values if you don't "appraise" properly.

I don't know of any PCs that have put a lot of ranks into appraise. A few, yes, but not many. Most games handwave the valuation of loot, with GMs simply telling the players what loot was found on those bodies and treasury - not asking them to spend a fair bit of time rolling to see if they figure it all out correctly.

I would bet you anything that the people who are on the free crafter side usually has things like that handwaved and so they get used to it and expects all other groups to play the same way.

- my character happens to be an inquisitor (one who dislikes mages, no less), so figuring out that the crafting wizard is dishonest with the rest of the party, will come out at some point (gotta love that high sense motive and detect lies)

How are you coming up with the Wizard being dishonest to start with? Charging 10% is actually being more than honest, he is giving a discount.

You can't meta-game the cost of an item and then expect to declare the Wizard is being dishonest therefore your sense motive and detect lies should show what you want it to show.

In actuality your sense motive would show that he is giving you a deal and detect lies would come up with nothing.

Dishonest is if the wizard is claiming no charge when he's in fact charging.

Sorry but Sel we've already covered why the crafter is losing money when crafting for the group and you've said you leave it to the DM to fix right?

But if you have 4 items drop everytime you go adventuring and 3 of them are worth 4k and the other is worth 8k is the crafter still screwing the party because the 8k item is to push up his WBL?

Isn't it true that there is no way to give him the extra money the feat says it should give him without implementing some sort of unequal share either during loot splits or in the rewards from either NPCs or from the loot pile, or from fees?

And if that is true isn't it similarly dishonest not to mention theft from the crafter to actively oppose giving him that share?

And you're getting hung up on the principle without considering the results. Crafters purposefully chose to be less effective by burning their feats, yet you demand to reap all the same benefits for no cost, while keeping all your feats, and providing no compensation to the crafter. Your demands do not result in 50% -off items. They result in full price items at the store. Your demands kill the golden goose.

Animal Farm.

Except that anyone taking a crafting feat that nets gear they can use, is insane to think it gives them no benefit.

Unless your DM perfectly tailors to your every want need and desire in loot drops the feat is still a *great* choice. Even if he Does tailor to your want and desires it lets you get any given item alot sooner than you otherwise would (due to it only costing you half).
I don't think anyone is really arguing that the crafting feats aren't useful. Just that they aren't something they get to charge the party for.

*clears throat*

Cindy: "My name is Cindy Crafter, and I can save you 40% over buying something at the store."

Group: "FORTY PERCENT IS NOT ENOUGH I DEMAND FIFTY PERCENT."

Cindy: "...."

next session:

Cindy's Player: "I have dumped Cindy and rolled up a Barbarian. I demand that you guys craft things for me at 50% off."

Now nobody gets their 50% off items. See how Communism kills the golden goose?

In fact I have been the one pointing out that this insistence on knowing "exact" values of items is ridiculous. However, recognizing a 15% difference in value does NOT require knowing the fractional copper value of an item.

Answer this question - how does your PC know that the crafter cannot sell his wares for more than wholesale?

Because he knows there is no distinction between "crafted" magic items and "looted" magic items, and he knows how much he can sell his "looted" magic items for.

If you're going to argue that what a crafted item sells for at the magic shop is some sort of deeply kept secret between the crafters and the shopowners, I'm just going to laugh at you.

Sigh, I keep allowing myself to get dragged back into this nonsense.

Those of you who want to make a profit off of your party members because it's just so awesome to have a lot of gold in your pockets, but you want to convince yourself you're doing the party a huge favor by filling your pockets with their gold...

whatever.... play as you like. If you end up playing with a bunch of PCs played like schmucks, then great, you won the accounting part of the game. Congratulations.

My point is that this is exactly the same can of worms that you've opened when you try to profit from crafting items for your colleagues.

It's only a can of worms to the meta-gamer who says "ahh, I wanted it at half-retail!"

Your repeated accusations of meta-gaming when I have deliberately and repeatedly demonstrated that my interpretation is 100% in-game and based on the world the PCs live in is just getting old and tired loaba.

As is your insistence that your PC knows the exact listed value of X item. It's like your PC comes with his own copy of CRB.

Why did this guy join a group again? He's just in it for himself anyway.

-S

So kick him out and pay 100% for your items instead of 50%.

See how that works? Your ranger has taken Favored Enemy: Golden Goose.

Again we see the disingenuous argument of "I'm doing you a favor by taking your gold."

Do me a favor. Take the feat and don't charge me extra. Or don't take the feat. I won't miss it. I'm not looking for "discounted magic items". I'm looking for dragons to kill. And I'm quite confident I can loot all the stuff I need, without your disingenuous "I'm doing it all for you" comments as you line your pockets.

Do me a favor. Take the feat and don't charge me extra. Or don't take the feat. I won't miss it. I'm not looking for "discounted magic items". I'm looking for dragons to kill. And I'm quite confident I can loot all the stuff I need, without your disingenuous "I'm doing it all for you" comments as you line your pockets.

And if the crafter takes the feat and doesn't craft for you, but only for themselves?

It sounds like you are telling me, that if my 10th level fighter has sold 20,000 Longswords +1 for the exact same price every time

*looks innocently at Selgard*

Hmm, doesn't the rogue/bard face sell the items? So how would the fighter know?

*get's behind safe cover*

That was the point of my comment in an earlier post when I told the story of my husband's character's use of the FR feat that let him sell for 75% instead of 50%. He handled allthe group sales and never ( IC) told the group he was getting more for the sale. He'd come back and split the 50% and get his share plus the 25% extra. I think he was actually disappointed no one ever challenged him on it.

I was the gm but I told him later that I'd have said " OK, keep your bonus but you don't get to share the loot split."

So just out of curiosity, if Grak the Half Orc Barbarian decides to spend some down time and loot (from his share) on ale and whores, is he stealing from the party? I mean, since he could be using that time and money on something that could benefit the party instead of selfishly getting syphilis?

Why did this guy join a group again? He's just in it for himself anyway.

-S

So kick him out and pay 100% for your items instead of 50%.

See how that works? Your ranger has taken Favored Enemy: Golden Goose.

Again we see the disingenuous argument of "I'm doing you a favor by taking your gold."

Do me a favor. Take the feat and don't charge me extra. Or don't take the feat. I won't miss it. I'm not looking for "discounted magic items". I'm looking for dragons to kill. And I'm quite confident I can loot all the stuff I need, without your disingenuous "I'm doing it all for you" comments as you line your pockets.

But Selgard doesn't want people to take crafting feats purely for their personal use. Selgard wants everyone who has a crafting feat to craft at cost for him.

Thanks for that. . . These abbreviations always throw me through a loop. The ruling reads well, and works in a mathematical way. Unfortunately the consequences of the ruling effectively discourage crafting for the group in any way, with or without discount. After all If I craft at cost or discount then the recipient would lose out on future loot due to their overabundance of character wealth, and if I charge anything then I would be over the line in terms of character wealth and would be subsequently docked. Of course a customized set of gear is more effective then the found variety, but there is a certain fun to the discovery and recovery of "Loot." I guess that comes down to group preference, To Loot or To Customize.

How this relates to this debate still confounds me however. If this ruling is in effect, and the party is concerned about the volume/value of loot collected. . . then crafting for the party at all is discouraged. Unless you charge full price and donate all proceeds to someone/something else. If the party isn't concerned then this is simply meaningless. So either it has no bearing, or it disagrees with both sides depending on ones preference in loot collection. . . seems an odd thing to bring up.

Mayhaps I'm missing something though. It happens.

Second point of "?". . . the bringing up of capitalism vs. communism. Regardless of your opinion on how a nation's economy should be set up, this has no bearing on how to survive a fight with a troll. I've never served in the armed services, nor do I want to. . . but I suspect that if a couple marines are in a firefight and one asks the other for a clip of ammo, they don't start haggling over price. Despite being armed in the service of a capitalist country. . .

Speaking only for the groups that I've played in of course, the group has X resources gathered from loot and such. Those resources are spent to maximize the effectiveness of the group. Our games tend to be pretty brutal, and we don't have the luxury much else. If the crafter wants to hold on to spare cash and act as the party's bookkeeper than more power to him/her. The rest of us are focused on rescuing princesses and whatnot, and tracking gold is almost as fun as tracking initiative. When the party is first formed folks often have some cash on their character sheet. . . and I've seen evil rogues spend that money to help the wizard get that one extra spell in the spell book. Survival first and all that.

Because he knows there is no distinction between "crafted" magic items and "looted" magic items, and he knows how much he can sell his "looted" magic items for.

Just because he takes the first offer, doesn't mean the crafter does. So the answer is, unless he's there to witness a transaction, he really doesn't know what the crafter might get for any items he makes.

You, Adamantine Dragon, the player, know that crafter can't sell for more than wholesale. That's meta-gaming. You should also know that there is a chance, in certain situations, where the crafter could possibly negotiate something higher than the flat 50.

Why did this guy join a group again? He's just in it for himself anyway.

-S

So kick him out and pay 100% for your items instead of 50%.

See how that works? Your ranger has taken Favored Enemy: Golden Goose.

Again we see the disingenuous argument of "I'm doing you a favor by taking your gold."

Do me a favor. Take the feat and don't charge me extra. Or don't take the feat. I won't miss it. I'm not looking for "discounted magic items". I'm looking for dragons to kill. And I'm quite confident I can loot all the stuff I need, without your disingenuous "I'm doing it all for you" comments as you line your pockets.

I'd take 40% off over full price any day. Sure I'd like 50% but 40% is not worth pouting about. I think my equipment in I got for less will help kill those dragons, the crafter gets a bit more cash for some extra things to help me kill some dragons. So it's no loss, I'm better off and they are better off.

Second point of "?". . . the bringing up of capitalism vs. communism. Regardless of your opinion on how a nation's economy should be set up, this has no bearing on how to survive a fight with a troll. I've never served in the armed services, nor do I want to. . . but I suspect that if a couple marines are in a firefight and one asks the other for a clip of ammo, they don't start haggling over price. Despite being armed in the service of a capitalist country. . .

The discussions about capatilism and socialism/communism were invoked when the subject moved to out of combat/downtime activities.

The reference was that the fee crafters were capatilists (when being polite) and that the free crafters were communists. This was about how they handled loot and down time activities.

The free crafters are saying that all you downtime (often refered to as group downtime) should be spent on making the group better.

The fee crafters are saying that during downtime, the time is their own, to spend on how they want to, including crafting for fellow group members with a small fee above cost.

A better example would be two marines stationed in Afganistan. One, as a hobby makes killer sunglasses, effective at keeping glare and such at a minimum. He sells them as a side business. Free crafters are saying that he should sell them to his platoon/squad mates at cost, regardless of how much downtime it takes, while fee crafters are saying that he has the choice of how much to sell items made during time off, and that a small fee over costs is not unreasonable.

Because he knows there is no distinction between "crafted" magic items and "looted" magic items, and he knows how much he can sell his "looted" magic items for.

Just because he takes the first offer, doesn't mean the crafter does. So the answer is, unless he's there to witness a transaction, he really doesn't know what the crafter might get for any items he makes.

You, Adamantine Dragon, the player, know that crafter can't sell for more than wholesale. That's meta-gaming. You should also know that there is a chance, in certain situations, where the crafter could possibly negotiate something higher than the flat 50.

I really shouldn't jump back in here because i've been absent for the last 400 points, but it seems the same things come up

who says it is the crafter who sells loot? and who says the crafter is the only one who knows what things are worth?

even assuming me, as the big dumb fighter, don't know anything about prices, don't worry about how the loot is distributed or sold off, i just get a pile of shinys after each adventure, i assume wholesale (read as crafted prices) will come up sometime in the adventure if not right away when I purchase something and mention that one of my friends is a crafter. Or the one time I come along cause we're in a dangerous town and I accompany someone to sell off the loot.

Now, i'd just like to clear up that however you wanna play is fine, but learning prices is not a purely metagame aspect

I know i'm being suicidal but i'll try to get a shot at the discussion.
Assumption. Party has a free week in city waiting to be received by some high noble who takes his sweet time when receiving visitor. What Crafty can do in this time?

Option 1: he can spend 7k in raw material to craft an item worth 14k to equip it, actually gaining 7k in whealt

Option 2: he can spend 7k in raw material to craft an item worth 14k that is usless to him, but that he can try to resell to someone (any NPC)

Option 3: he can spend 7K in raw material to craft an item worth 14k for a member of his party

Option 1 nets him 100% of the investment, and should be priorityzed always. When option 1 is not available, he can then chose between number 2 or 3. If you let occasionally sell items at a different price tag trough roleplay, then the option 2 will fruit Crafty an imprecised amount of money. In this case, is only fair that option number 3 will net Crafty a reasonable amount of gold to be comparable to the option number 2. An here the different ways of mastering takes the toll.
Now, if you NEVER EVER NOT EVEN UNDER DEATH TREATH allow pg to sell anything for even 1 gp more than 50% the book prices, then is a matter of consequence that option 3 should not be more profitable than option 2 and so Crafty should not charge his fellows. But if you take a less RAW and more reasonable* approach to the sellings, you may only find fair for Crafty to charge something for his work, since he is ditching ptential profit from option 2 to craft for you.
Of corse this is based of the opinion that, even if a player is not allowed to charge extra for his service, he is not either required to have any kind of economic loss, following the same reasoning that you do not ask anyone to sell their equipment to give you gold. Or that you ask fighter to get Bodyguard as a feat becouse benefits you more than say weapon focus. No one is allowed to feed on others, nor by charging extra nor by demanding free gifts.

I'd take 40% off over full price any day. Sure I'd like 50% but 40% is not worth pouting about. I think my equipment in I got for less will help kill those dragons, the crafter gets a bit more cash for some extra things to help me kill some dragons. So it's no loss, I'm better off and they are better off.

so I end up on the free crafter side because I don't want there to be a wealth disparity in the party, and charging 10% can cause a pretty nice sized disparity in a party of 4 people.

now, if the GM corrects for the wealth disparity, or if the PC uses the extra money to tithe/build an orphanage or other RP endeavors that don't increase character power relative to the others, I would have no problem. I wouldn't have a problem if the GM rewards the player for building orphanages and tithing money, but when the player uses the money to increase their power above the rest of the party, that's where i have a problem.

so I end up on the free crafter side because I don't want there to be a wealth disparity in the party, and charging 10% can cause a pretty nice sized disparity in a party of 4 people.

Would you be open to giving me your opinion on something?

A few hundred posts back, I brought up some math that I believes to refute your argument above. Selgard stated that he felt it was the GM's job to correct WBL inequities, but I don't believe he ever commented on the math itself. Gauss did comment on it, indicating that I had a small error in the math, using a formula that hurt my brain, and gave a different result of 1% off of mine.

Mistwalker wrote:

SKR’s clarification states that for calculations of Wealth By Level (WBL), the totals for crafter’s crafted items is based on the crafting price, not the base cost. Everyone else has their WBL calculated using the base cost.

This does not mean that the crafter get’s double loot/gold/drops/etc..

This does have a major impact on WBL calculations.

10th level party of 4
WBL 62,000 gp

No crafter party
4 characters have a WBL of 62,000 gp

Free crafter party
3 characters have a WBL of 124,000 gp
crafter has a WBL of 62,000 gp

GM either has to add a lot more items for the crafter, or may simply drop the loot for everyone and the crafter falls farther and farther behind.

Fee crafter party 10% fee
3 characters pay the crafter 6,200 gp, leaving them 55,800 gp, which turns into WBL of 111, 600
crafter has 62,000+3*6200= a WBL of 80,600

So, to me, this means that the easiest way to keep WBL in balance, without the GM having to do anything, is for all crafters to charge a 20% fee. The GM does not have to change drops, create special drops, talk to the group to explain why the crafter is suddenly getting a bonus of xxx gold, etc..

Selgard (hey, I spelled it right this time :)), I know that you have stated that you are not a numbers person, but could I get your reaction to the above?

I know i'm being suicidal but i'll try to get a shot at the discussion.

Assumption. Party has a free week in city waiting to be received by some high noble who takes his sweet time when receiving visitor. What Crafty can do in this time?

Option 1: he can spend 7k in raw material to craft an item worth 14k to equip it, actually gaining 7k in whealt

Option 2: he can spend 7k in raw material to craft an item worth 14k that is usless to him, but that he can try to resell to someone (any NPC)

Option 3: he can spend 7K in raw material to craft an item worth 14k for a member of his party

Option 1 nets him 100% of the investment, and should be priorityzed always. When option 1 is not available, he can then chose between number 2 or 3. If you let occasionally sell items at a different price tag trough roleplay, then the option 2 will fruit Crafty an imprecised amount of money. In this case, is only fair that option number 3 will net Crafty a reasonable amount of gold to be comparable to the option number 2. An here the different ways of mastering takes the toll.
Now, if you NEVER EVER NOT EVEN UNDER DEATH TREATH allow pg to sell anything for even 1 gp more than 50% the book prices, then is a matter of consequence that option 3 should not be more profitable than option 2 and so Crafty should not charge his fellows. But if you take a less RAW and more reasonable* approach to the sellings, you may only find fair for Crafty to charge something for his work, since he is ditching ptential profit from option 2 to craft for you.
Of corse this is based of the opinion that, even if a player is not allowed to charge extra for his service, he is not either required to have any kind of economic loss, following the same reasoning that you do not ask anyone to sell their equipment to give you gold. Or that you ask fighter to get Bodyguard as a feat becouse benefits you more than say weapon focus. No one is allowed to feed on others, nor by charging extra nor by demanding free gifts.

You forgot Option 4, doing something that he personally enjoys rather than spending all his time crafting. I don't know what you do for a living, but presumably you take some time away from it to play Pathfinder at a bare minimum. The only people I know of he work, then go home and do the same thing for fun, are programmers. And the stuff they code at home doesn't belong to their employers.

Hey, I'm partial to the math that I presented and that got promptly ignored in the 1200s!

PS working on that 2000+ job.

Are you sure it's not the same as QuantumSteve's calculation in the high 900s (link please?).

Also, you should know by now that sensible posts get ignored around here. You have to call someone out by name and make it really inflammatory. Even then they'll respond as though they hadn't read beyond the first two lines. Then your job is to respond with something that you've posted earlier in the thread. And so on until the internet explodes.

You forgot Option 4, doing something that he personally enjoys rather than spending all his time crafting. I don't know what you do for a living, but presumably you take some time away from it to play Pathfinder at a bare minimum. The only people I know of he work, then go home and do the same thing for fun, are programmers. And the stuff they code at home doesn't belong to their employers.

Optimal way to spend his time in my opinion. However, this option, while perhaps the most funny, is of no impact to the economics an so is of no relevance to the discussion. If he go and hang out with some random wench or get drunk to local taver or go home to his beloved who was eagerly awaiting for his return, he got his free time in the same way of everyone else and end it here. No point doing comparison. We can't give monetary value to free time in a vacuum, we can only compare actual profit to something economist call "profit potential" that in material plane dictionary would be "whatever i would have gained if i was doing something else than this crap".

Hey, I'm partial to the math that I presented and that got promptly ignored in the 1200s!

PS working on that 2000+ job.

I found it - post 1222. I worked out a more general formula (post 1245) and then realized that it was the same as Quantum Steve wrote down (post 644 - for some reason I thought it was more recent). So I'll go out on a limb and say that we haven't had any new ideas here since the mid-600's.

I found it - post 1222. I worked out a more general formula (post 1245) and then realized that it was the same as Quantum Steve wrote down (post 644 - for some reason I thought it was more recent). So I'll go out on a limb and say that we haven't had any new ideas here since the mid-600's.

Sigh, you may be correct about Quantum Steve's post. I missed the implications of what he was saying.

Well, to salve my ego, I will simply think to myself that my example is much more blatant, with the results jumping out at you.
:)

You forgot Option 4, doing something that he personally enjoys rather than spending all his time crafting. I don't know what you do for a living, but presumably you take some time away from it to play Pathfinder at a bare minimum. The only people I know of he work, then go home and do the same thing for fun, are programmers. And the stuff they code at home doesn't belong to their employers.

Optimal way to spend his time in my opinion. However, this option, while perhaps the most funny, is of no impact to the economics an so is of no relevance to the discussion. If he go and hang out with some random wench or get drunk to local taver or go home to his beloved who was eagerly awaiting for his return, he got his free time in the same way of everyone else and end it here. No point doing comparison. We can't give monetary value to free time in a vacuum, we can only compare actual profit to something economist call "profit potential" that in material plane dictionary would be "whatever i would have gained if i was doing something else than this crap".

Actually, economists call that "opportunity cost". But only the person in question can place a value on his free time. If he spends his time crafting and selling to make profit, obviously he valued his time less than that profit. If he decides to spend some time with his kids, he obviously valued that more than the gold. And since the person does value it to some degree, then it does have an economic impact. (I'd actually argue that all decisions are economic decisions, even if they don't directly involve money.)

The discussions about capatilism and socialism/communism were invoked when the subject moved to out of combat/downtime activities.

A better example would be two marines stationed in Afganistan. One, as a hobby makes killer sunglasses, effective at keeping glare and such at a minimum. He sells them as a side business. Free crafters are saying that he should sell them to his platoon/squad mates at cost, regardless of how much downtime it takes, while fee crafters are saying that he has the choice of how much to sell items made during time off, and that a small fee over costs is not unreasonable.

hmmm. .. I'd say no. A better example would be one member of the squad crafts ammo, and the rest are feeling the need for more ammo. Does the one provide ammo at cost or not. Reason being is that we aren't discussing accessories, but by and large essential survival tools. Even though the activity occurs between fights, it is being done to help survive the fights yet to come.

Second problem with the argument is that economic theories revolve around the prosperity of nations, and break down completely when applied to the microcosms of small communities. Tribes and communes have existed and even prospered over generations without the profit motive. . . at small scales. The idea of capitalism is based on a foundation of large scale economies, not a half dozen folks overcoming a challenge. Whether that challenge is a dungeon, or a winter. Regardless of one's stance in the politics of economy or party resource allocation, this argument simply does not work. It's like trying to use Newtonian physics in Quantum Mechanics. Newtonian laws work great within certain scales and speeds, but breaks down pretty quick outside of them. Similar problems occur with economic theory, as soon as you change the discussion from nations to individuals they simply don't apply. Aspects might, but you'd have to start from scratch in establishing why.

Thirdly, if an individuals income/livelihood is based on the crafting and selling of widgets. . . then of course they should charge for their time. It's essentially part of the widget. As a player who often plays crafters, I go so far as to use my own funds to help the fighter afford better armor. But then my character derives their livelihood by plundering crypts and fighting dragons. The success of which likely hinges on that armor.

There may be arguments that successfully support a fee position, but economic models fail to do so.
Vedoun

hmmm. .. I'd say no. A better example would be one member of the squad crafts ammo, and the rest are feeling the need for more ammo. Does the one provide ammo at cost or not. Reason being is that we aren't discussing accessories, but by and large essential survival tools. Even though the activity occurs between fights, it is being done to help survive the fights yet to come.

I would not agree that magic items are by an large essential survival tools. A handy haversack is necessary to survival, useful yes, but a regular backpack would also do.

As for the ammo example - well, with the possible exception of some special forces folks, most soldier use and carry issue ammo. But to use the scenario, would really expect to get at cost ammo from someone who made during their off duty time, while you were watching movies, drinking or just googing off? Ammo that he spent hours and hours making? Would you value his time so little?

The discussions about capatilism and socialism/communism were invoked when the subject moved to out of combat/downtime activities.

A better example would be two marines stationed in Afganistan. One, as a hobby makes killer sunglasses, effective at keeping glare and such at a minimum. He sells them as a side business. Free crafters are saying that he should sell them to his platoon/squad mates at cost, regardless of how much downtime it takes, while fee crafters are saying that he has the choice of how much to sell items made during time off, and that a small fee over costs is not unreasonable.

hmmm. .. I'd say no. A better example would be one member of the squad crafts ammo, and the rest are feeling the need for more ammo. Does the one provide ammo at cost or not. Reason being is that we aren't discussing accessories, but by and large essential survival tools. Even though the activity occurs between fights, it is being done to help survive the fights yet to come.

Second problem with the argument is that economic theories revolve around the prosperity of nations, and break down completely when applied to the microcosms of small communities. Tribes and communes have existed and even prospered over generations without the profit motive. . . at small scales. The idea of capitalism is based on a foundation of large scale economies, not a half dozen folks overcoming a challenge. Whether that challenge is a dungeon, or a winter. Regardless of one's stance in the politics of economy or party resource allocation, this argument simply does not work. It's like trying to use Newtonian physics in Quantum Mechanics. Newtonian laws work great within certain scales and speeds, but breaks down pretty quick outside of them. Similar problems occur with economic theory, as soon as you change the discussion from nations to individuals they simply don't apply. Aspects might, but you'd have to start from scratch in establishing why.

Thirdly, if an individuals income/livelihood is...

Not true the magic junk he makes isn't essential adventurers survive without a crafter to make their junk all the time in fact the game is designed with the assumption that they can do so.

In reality the magic gear is useful trinkets it's like running shoes sure you can get a custom pair made for you that optimize your running but that doesn't mean that it's impossible to run without them.

Wealth of each party member with no crafter, 50k, and only have 32 days of down time.

Party 1 50k
Party 2 50k
Party 3 50k
Party 4 50k

Now if there is a crafter, there are going to be 8 days of crafting each person.

Player 1 54K
Player 2 54k
Player 3 54k
Player 4 54K

A little bit wealth disparity but not much, which easily be made up on next treasure hall.

Now lets say someone in the group wants an item that normally is 16k or 16 days, person 2-4 are still going to want their items.

End results

Player 1 58k
Player 2 54k
Player 3 54k
Player 4 50k

A little bit wealth disparity takes much longer to fix unless loot goes to slightly lopsided. You're going to expect this to happen when you get if there is no commission fee. Player 1 is going to be either the wizard or someone who views the caster's time is worthless.

Now if the caster wants to make 2 items for 8 days each. But his party members also want 8 days worth of work. Someone is going to get hosed, so instead the crafter charges 25% of his work and everyone get 8 days including the caster himself. The crafter buy his second item at full price because the downtime is limited.

Player 1 60k
Player 2 52k
Player 3 52k
Player 4 52k

Granted player 2-3 are equal, but player 1 has a bit more wealth. But on the upside it's easier to adjust the wealth's group loot could be generated in way that it doesn't benefit player 1 as much as player 2-4.

Now lets assume Player 1 charges 20% and each player wants 11k worth of item. So player 1 makes the items and decides to purchase said items in the market place.

Player 1 56.6k
Player 2 53.3k
Player 3 53.3k
Player 4 53.3k

It's a smaller gap. Now lets see if it's at 10% like OP charged.

Player 1 53.3K
Player 2 54.4K
Player 3 54.4K
Player 4 54.4K

It becomes reverse, the players are actually profiting off the crafter in the above scenario.

So in short it depends on how much free time the crafter has and it's all depended on how much known free time the player can spend. Your free time can be interrupted by some sort outside events: like a giant tribe raid, sibling gets kidnapped etc all canceling whatever free time you have.

My math is based on 50k - (cost of materials + any commissioning fee) + cost of said final item.

I would not agree that magic items are by an large essential survival tools. A handy haversack is necessary to survival, useful yes, but a regular backpack would also do.

As for the ammo example - well, with the possible exception of some special forces folks, most soldier use and carry issue ammo. But to use the scenario, would really expect to get at cost ammo from someone who made during their off duty time, while you were watching movies, drinking or just googing off? Ammo that he spent hours and hours making? Would you value his time so little?

If you'd like to move the goalposts to a more nuanced aspect of which gear we are talking about so be it. I was referring to the essentials, armor, weapon, stat enhancers etc. Rather than accessories. . . If the party has finished acquiring the resources it needs to maximize its effectiveness, and the rogue wants an extra bauble, then charging has little meaning one way or another.

I suspect my initial example of the marines in combat was the most apropos of the examples placed so far, as off hand as it was. No direct analogy exists with RL, as combat is handled classically with large scale economies as backing. Though I seem to recall Russia during WW1 or 2 would have one soldier with the gun, the other with the ammo. Though the logistics of large scale warfare don't necessarily apply, and frankly the heat of the moment aspect of my initial example I think applies better then the refinements that followed. Reason being that the logistics of running a war, like economies, are larger and more complicated things than the methods of small group survival. The mechanics of the crafting feats are very simple, and the more complicated parallels simply don't work. Whereas the simpler analogy I initially used, while by no means perfect, did analogize better.

The crafter typically has a talent the other characters do not have, so it is less a question of laziness as ability. Typically what the such-and-such thousand is spent on is hand-waved/ignored. But I can invent resources requiring the persuasion of the rogue or the intimidation of the fighter just as easily as you assume folks are spending their off-duty hours goofing off. In my invented scenario the party is helping the crafter get the goods needed to craft. Again, typically off-duty aspects of the adventurer's life are ignored, such as the effort a fighter has to make to maintain such a high strength score, or the studies the wizard is involved with to get those spells each level. . .

I'm afraid the argument that the crafter is working and everyone else is being lazy is exploiting the fact the off-duty hours are overlooked. . . as rolling to see how many push-ups one gets is less then exciting. Various player guides since at least 2nd edition have stated that the off-duty hours are filled with training and equipment maintenance. Each is spending their off-duty time (unless explicitly stated otherwise) maximizing the effectiveness of their chosen role.

Mistwalker wrote:

Not true the magic junk he makes isn't essential adventurers survive without a crafter to make their junk all the time in fact the game is designed with the assumption that they can do so.

That's a DM concern. The players do what they can, the DM fills in essential gaps. The above argument doesn't really support Fee or Free. If anything it supports not crafting for the party at all. The assumption in every other post for and against a fee is that the crafting has value. If the crafting has no value then the entire question is moot.

I would argue that customized equipment improves the chances of the party's survival and success. The DM may choose to provide custom crafted goods to the player, or not. Typically not, occasionally an adventure path will state to change a weapon to a type used by the party. . . Usually the party makes due with what they have/can find. As such, my crafters do what they can to maximize the chances of the party's success. This is not "Good" or "Generous" It is Pragmatic.

Can the party acquire specific magical goods. Sure, though not reliably. Usually not of high-power either. If you as a DM provide reliable customized equipment services to the player at all power levels then there is no longer a point to taking the crafting feats. You can spend less and have me craft it for you (with or without fee) then you/the party gets less gear/loot to account for the increase in party wealth. Remember the ruling you linked me too only applies to the person who took the crafting feats, everyone else who benefits would be treated as if they have too much wealth for their level. The only way they can benefit from having a crafter in the party then is if getting customized equipment is difficult or impossible otherwise.

That of course is up to your game. My assumption walking in was that the crafting feats had value, to both the individual as well as the party. Hence the discussion of how much the party should pay for that benefit.

Perhaps this discussion has moved the goal posts off the field.
Vedoun

The problem I have with this is the absolute absurdity that is being displayed by the whining non-crafter. "What!? You won't give me 100% off the profit margin of the magic item? Well screw you, I'll buy from someone who will give me 0% off the profit margin, so that you get no money at all! Because it's for the betterment of the party!" /stupid

Oh my god I'd be too tempted to just rock that player's world as a GM.
Stupid Player - "Ok magic item shopkeeper, I need a +2 Ring of Protection and a +1 amulet of natural armor. Got any of those?", Shopkeeper - "Well, not on hand. I can get 'em to you though. Can you wait for them to be crafted?", Stupid Player - "Sure, since there are no other item crafters around willing to craft me goodies for market price or better on demand.", Shopkeeper - "Ok, cool, come back in a week."

Shopkeeper commissions magic item X, Y, and Z from the party's own item crafter while they're in town. The shopkeeper takes 5% of the profits just because all he had to do is alert the creationist to the actual business. So stupid player pays the shopkeeper like 10,000 gp for a bunch of magic items because he was too stupid to accept a good deal and wanted to act like a spoiled brat, and then later crafter player comes along with about 9,500 gp in profits. Stupid player is all like "What!? Where did you get 9,500 gp?", Crafter - "Some shopkeeper was looking for an artisan, and had me craft the items and he just took a finder's fee."

It would be worth it to see the dirty bum's face. :P
=====================

Why? Because he's a moron. A greedy moron. A greedy, spiteful, moron. He argues that the crafter should craft items for him at cost, saving him 5,000 gp, under the argument that the crafter is preforming a party service by saving him 5,000 gp, because the item will be used by the party. When the crafter wants compensation for his time for crafting the exact item the guy wants, he sputters that the crafter is a jerk and decides to buy items at full price from someone outside the party out of spite; now he's flushing 5,000 gp down the drain.

Even buying the item at full price from the party's own crafter would be a better deal because he gets the item he wants, when he wants it, and the 5,000 gold continues to benefit the party. He is out no less buying it at full price from his friend than he would be buying it on demand from a dealer. He's a moron with a capital M.

so I end up on the free crafter side because I don't want there to be a wealth disparity in the party, and charging 10% can cause a pretty nice sized disparity in a party of 4 people.

Would you be open to giving me your opinion on something?

A few hundred posts back, I brought up some math that I believes to refute your argument above. Selgard stated that he felt it was the GM's job to correct WBL inequities, but I don't believe he ever commented on the math itself. Gauss did comment on it, indicating that I had a small error in the math, using a formula that hurt my brain, and gave a different result of 1% off of mine.

Mistwalker wrote:

SKR’s clarification states that for calculations of Wealth By Level (WBL), the totals for crafter’s crafted items is based on the crafting price, not the base cost. Everyone else has their WBL calculated using the base cost.

This does not mean that the crafter get’s double loot/gold/drops/etc..

This does have a major impact on WBL calculations.

10th level party of 4
WBL 62,000 gp

No crafter party
4 characters have a WBL of 62,000 gp

Free crafter party
3 characters have a WBL of 124,000 gp
crafter has a WBL of 62,000 gp

GM either has to add a lot more items for the crafter, or may simply drop the loot for everyone and the crafter falls farther and farther behind.

Fee crafter party 10% fee
3 characters pay the crafter 6,200 gp, leaving them 55,800 gp, which turns into WBL of 111, 600
crafter has 62,000+3*6200= a WBL of 80,600

So, to me, this means that the easiest way to keep WBL in balance, without the GM having to do anything, is for all crafters to charge a 20% fee. The GM does not have to change drops, create special drops, talk to the group to explain why the crafter is suddenly getting a bonus of xxx gold, etc..

Selgard

...

well... i've voiced lots of unhappy things around SKR's FAQ. i don't like the FAQ, i don't agree with it. I understand that you may be trying to execute the FAQ, but there's no non-wonky way to do it, and charging characters for crafting is something that could be a solution in your game but for me, it would need to be heavily monitored by the GM so that the crafter's wealth doesn't get out of control.

Personally, if i were to execute SKR's FAQ, i would infer that Item creation was a more intensely personal process and would work like preparing spells and i would revamp time constraints and such... but yeah, i'd normally just allow as much crafting as everyone wants, just give out only items

Hey, I'm partial to the math that I presented and that got promptly ignored in the 1200s!

PS working on that 2000+ job.

Are you sure it's not the same as QuantumSteve's calculation in the high 900s (link please?).

Also, you should know by now that sensible posts get ignored around here. You have to call someone out by name and make it really inflammatory. Even then they'll respond as though they hadn't read beyond the first two lines. Then your job is to respond with something that you've posted earlier in the thread. And so on until the internet explodes.

I'm having a reasonably good time reposting the same thing that Selgard keeps dodging, wondering how he'll dodge it next.

The problem I have with this is the absolute absurdity that is being displayed by the whining non-crafter. "What!? You won't give me 100% off the profit margin of the magic item? Well screw you, I'll buy from someone who will give me 0% off the profit margin, so that you get no money at all! Because it's for the betterment of the party!" /stupid

Oh my god I'd be too tempted to just rock that player's world as a GM.
Stupid Player - "Ok magic item shopkeeper, I need a +2 Ring of Protection and a +1 amulet of natural armor. Got any of those?", Shopkeeper - "Well, not on hand. I can get 'em to you though. Can you wait for them to be crafted?", Stupid Player - "Sure, since there are no other item crafters around willing to craft me goodies for market price or better on demand.", Shopkeeper - "Ok, cool, come back in a week."

Shopkeeper commissions magic item X, Y, and Z from the party's own item crafter while they're in town. The shopkeeper takes 5% of the profits just because all he had to do is alert the creationist to the actual business. So stupid player pays the shopkeeper like 10,000 gp for a bunch of magic items because he was too stupid to accept a good deal and wanted to act like a spoiled brat, and then later crafter player comes along with about 9,500 gp in profits. Stupid player is all like "What!? Where did you get 9,500 gp?", Crafter - "Some shopkeeper was looking for an artisan, and had me craft the items and he just took a finder's fee."

It would be worth it to see the dirty bum's face. :P
=====================

Why? Because he's a moron. A greedy moron. A greedy, spiteful, moron. He argues that the crafter should craft items for him at cost, saving him 5,000 gp, under the argument that the crafter is preforming a party service by saving him 5,000 gp, because the item will be used by the party. When the crafter wants compensation for his time for crafting the exact item the guy wants, he sputters that the crafter is a jerk and decides to buy items at full price from someone outside...

just tossing the game balance/favoritism issues aside...

yeah, not maximizing your profit isn't the most optimal thing, but my fighter really doesn't like the idea of the crafter taking 2 shares out of the wealth after I have put myself in serious threat of death to keep that demon from ripping him apart, or getting in the way of the charging iron golem also not knowing if i'm going to live for another minute and considering making peace with the god i don't believe in due to the threat, but i know my buddy can't take as much of a beating as me, and would become pavement paste unless i get in the way.

these are a couple situations where i would feel a little cheated if the crafter wants to profit off of the new armor he's making me so that i'm less quickly beaten to death because it directly benefits him.

now I can understand if your game isn't as selfless as mine because the fighters i tend to play value the group far more than anything else in the world, and that's not how everyone plays, and isn't even the only enjoyable way to play. but this is just one example. there are others

Hey, I'm partial to the math that I presented and that got promptly ignored in the 1200s!

PS working on that 2000+ job.

Are you sure it's not the same as QuantumSteve's calculation in the high 900s (link please?).

Also, you should know by now that sensible posts get ignored around here. You have to call someone out by name and make it really inflammatory. Even then they'll respond as though they hadn't read beyond the first two lines. Then your job is to respond with something that you've posted earlier in the thread. And so on until the internet explodes.

I'm having a reasonably good time reposting the same thing that Selgard keeps dodging, wondering how he'll dodge it next.

Also, Animal Farm.

I'm thinking of putting together a meta-thread called "What do you think are the ten best posts of the 'Creating magical item for the party + small fee on the work = players uprorar?' thread" thread. Of course probably eight of the top ten comments were posted by me.

edit: Also, Khmer Rouge! Selgard do you not hear my siren song?
edit^2: This has to be at least the twelfth or thirteenth shark this thread has jumped.

my thing is the crafting and wealth is something that should be talked about OOG so that people know what to expect before the game.

I do agree with selgard that crafters who charge are taking an extra share of the wealth just because they took a powerful feat. now, with SKR's FAQ, the easiest way to incorporate that isn't to charge to make items, it is to not make items for others.

A few hundred posts back, I brought up some math that I believes to refute your argument above. Selgard stated that he felt it was the GM's job to correct WBL inequities, but I don't believe he ever commented on the math itself. Gauss did comment on it, indicating that I had a small error in the math, using a formula that hurt my brain, and gave a different result of 1% off of mine.

The math was simply: 62,000/1.1=X (for 10% fee) or 62,000/1.2=X (for 20%). The equation this was based on is X+0.1X=62000 (for 10%) or X+0.2X=62000 (for 20%). X is the amount of treasure you can craft before adding in the fee. The answer given is the amount of money that you can craft with before adding in the fee. In the case of 20% itll be 4% off for your version. The higher the fee the more the error will show. Im sorry I hurt your brain.

my thing is the crafting and wealth is something that should be talked about OOG so that people know what to expect before the game.

So what do you do when the rest of party says "okay, Alex; we'll take Custom Crafted Items for 40% off retail"?

i'll make my argument. we vote, i'm out voted, I play the game. i'll talk to the GM to see if he is going to adress the wealth disparity or not. if he's not, i'll create a crafter myself cause i love crafting.

or we'll see if the crafter has his head swell up too much and starts treating my char like crap. if not, i'll have fun in the game, cozy up to the caster, and maybe get a discount on some of the things i use that i could convince him will benefit him enough to give it to me at cost. i'm easy

but also if he is just amassing wealth and lording it over my char, i'll wait until he gets into trouble and just let him die. or help him to his death. but not the first time because that's just prickish, but there is a possibility that I would let his character die so i could profit because i assume this game is going to be more 'watch out for number 1' types of games

EDIT: the other scenario is that the character is collecting the money to build orphanages or tithe to his church or something RP that isn't meant to increase the character's power, i wouldn't even raise an argument against it

Hey, I'm partial to the math that I presented and that got promptly ignored in the 1200s!

PS working on that 2000+ job.

Are you sure it's not the same as QuantumSteve's calculation in the high 900s (link please?).

Also, you should know by now that sensible posts get ignored around here. You have to call someone out by name and make it really inflammatory. Even then they'll respond as though they hadn't read beyond the first two lines. Then your job is to respond with something that you've posted earlier in the thread. And so on until the internet explodes.

I'm having a reasonably good time reposting the same thing that Selgard keeps dodging, wondering how he'll dodge it next.

Also, Animal Farm.

I'm thinking of putting together a meta-thread called "What do you think are the ten best posts of the 'Creating magical item for the party + small fee on the work = players uprorar?' thread" thread. Of course probably eight of the top ten comments were posted by me.

edit: Also, Khmer Rouge! Selgard do you not hear my siren song?
edit^2: This has to be at least the twelfth or thirteenth shark this thread has jumped.

The new thread has been created. If I get banned for this I just want you all to know that it's been fun (even/especially Selgard, Dragonfire and AD).